Re: [Simple] Address and person URIs

[Jonathan Rosenberg <jdrosen at dynamicsoft.com>]

inline.

Henning Schulzrinne wrote:

> > I am fine with that, although it may be difficult to register such a 
> > uri scheme.
>
> In a different context (emergency services and tel URIs), I've thought 
> about a 'service' URI which indicates a generic content-oriented 
> communication service. This addresses the current deficiency of the tel 
> URI (really, URN) that can't express services nicely.
>
> There may be a connnection there, i.e.,
>
> urn:service:inperson

To be clear, is your intent here that urn:service would be defined as 
allowing registered values through an IANA registry or something? i.e., 
if I come up with a new service, foo, I could register it and thus 
urn:service:foo would be defined?

I'm not sure how one would properly define the scope of "service" in 
such a context...

-Jonathan R.


--
Jonathan D. Rosenberg, Ph.D.                600 Lanidex Plaza
Chief Technology Officer                    Parsippany, NJ 07054-2711
dynamicsoft
jdrosen at dynamicsoft.com                     FAX:   (973) 952-5050
http://www.jdrosen.net                      PHONE: (973) 952-5000
http://www.dynamicsoft.com

_______________________________________________
Simple mailing list
Simple at ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple